Search for: "E.I. Dupont Nemours " Results 181 - 200 of 213
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
July 3, 2009 - Opinions ReleasedTEXAS SUPREME COURT ORDERS JUDGES TO EXPLAIN AND JUSTIFY WHY THEY GRANTED NEW TRIALS [in cases in which tort claim defendants had prevailed with the jury]"In the Interest of Justice" - a common label for judicial discretion in that regard and in others - will no longer pass muster as a sufficient ground. [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
DuPont De Nemours & Co., 868 P.2d 1114, 1121 (Colo. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 9:16 am by Dennis Crouch
by Dennis Crouch Substantive Patent Law: Newly filed petition in Merck & Cie v. [read post]
16 Jan 2017, 5:44 pm by Dennis Crouch
by Dennis Crouch A new Supreme Court justice will likely be in place by the end of April, although the Trump edition is unlikely to substantially shake-up patent law doctrine in the short term. [read post]
13 May 2011, 6:07 pm by Bexis
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 636 F.3d 88 (4th Cir. 2011), is an example. [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 4:57 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
(D.I. 598; D.I. 610) Butamax and DuPont also filed a motion to exclude testimony by Gevo's experts with respect to the '188 patent and '376 patent. [read post]
29 Mar 2021, 7:10 pm by admin
Some notes on vexing issue, which fortunately has never serious issue for me. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 10:51 am by Beck/Herrmann
We aren't the first to note the latest class action denial in the prescription medical product liability field, In re Panacryl Sutures Products Liability Cases, No. 5:08-MD-1959-BO, slip op. [read post]
14 May 2012, 8:24 am by Schachtman
Sometimes legal counsel take positions in court determined solely by the expediency of what expert witnesses are available, and what opinions are held by those witnesses. [read post]
29 May 2016, 9:38 am by Schachtman
The Heart of the Matter The classic early cases in products liability law were about consumers hurt by consumer products, sold by manufacturers or dealers directly to consumers. [read post]
19 Jul 2007, 1:47 pm
We're so used to adverse decisions out of the District of Minnesota - what with the defibrillator MDLs "distinguishing" Buckman into near oblivion, and the heart valve MDL persisting in certifying classes despite being told not to by the Eighth Circuit - that good news from that district is like a breath of fresh air.That's what we got recently in In re Baycol Products Litigation, 2007 WL 2004432 (D. [read post]